dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Environmental Economics

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OFT -S-S-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Oflice 
DATE: JUNE 14, 2018 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an environmental economist, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the 
job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). After a petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 
classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 
grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (I) that the foreign national's proposed 
endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign national is well 
positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, finding that the Petitioner had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and 
thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and contends that he is eligible for a national 
interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. In addition, he contends that the Director imposed 
an overly high standard of proof. With respect to the standard of proof in this matter, a petitioner 
must establish that he meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit sought by a preponderance of 
the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I& N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). In other words, a 
petitioner must show that what he claims is "more likely than not" or "'probably" true. To determine 
whether a petitioner has met his burden under the preponderance standard, we consider not only the 
quantity, but also the quality (including relevance, probative value, and credibility) of the evidence. 
/d. at 376; Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an 
individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Because this classification 
Matter of T-S-S-
requires that the individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required 
to establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability.-
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who 
are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent 
or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, 
will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in 
the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the 
United States. 
(B) Waiver of job offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he. Attorney General may, when the 
Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the 
requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, 
professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Malter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884. 1 Dhanasar states that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, 
users may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest waiver when the below prongs are 
met. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of 
areas such as business, entrepreneurial ism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors 
including, but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in 
related or similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 
.
Matter ofT-S-S-
proposed endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities 
or individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. · In 
performing this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the 
foreign national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the 
foreign national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, 
even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit 
from the foreign national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's 
contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, 
the factor(s) considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification? 
II. ANALYSIS 
Although not addressed by the Director, the record demonstrates that the Petitioner qualifies as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The evidence reflc<,:ts that he received a 
bachelor of arts qegree in economics and business administration from in California 
in 1979. In addition, the Petitioner provides letters fro!Jl his former employers, 
and indicating that he has at least five years of 
progressive post-baccalaureate experience in his specially equivalent to an advanced degree under 
the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).
4 
The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the 
requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. The 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(4)(ii) states, in pertinent part, "[t]o apply for the [national interest] 
exemption the petitioner must submit Form ETA-750B, Statement of Qualifications of Alien, in 
duplicate." The denial decision stated that "since the petitioner did not submit this required 
evidence, USCIS must deny the Form 1-140." With the appeal, the Petitioner offers a properly 
signed and fully executed ETA-750B form. Accordingly, the Director's finding on this issue is 
withdrawn. As discussed below, however, we find the Petitioner has not established eligibility for a 
national interest waiver under the analytical fram~work set forth in Dhanasar. 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
' The record includes a March 2000 letter from stating: "ln February 2000, inherited 
operation of our Company's Field Otlice in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as well as authority over employee 
records for its local statl'which included [the Petitioner}." · 
4 
A<> further evidence of his progressive post-baccalaureate experience, the Petitioner has offered a time line of events relating 
to the and oil field, a corporate overview of a in and an article 
about the and its oil spill response activities in the Persian 
Gulf. 
3 
.
Matter ofT-S-5-
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance of the Proposed Endeavor 
In Part 6 of the Form 1-140, "Basic Information About the Proposed Employment," the Petitioner 
listed his job title as "Marine Environmentalist" and indicated that he will "consult with respe[c]t to 
issues rela[tjed to the protection of the marine environment." In addition, the Petitioner has asserted 
that he intends "to offer consulting services to private companies and government agencies" as an 
environmental economist. He further states: 
As a consultant, [the Petitioner] wishes to engage with civil organizations, academia 
a·nd private sector partners throughout the United States. to impart his knowledge and 
experience in the areas of knowledge management, that is, managing knowledge 
products and training activities to improve best practices in environmental economics, 
particularly economic instruments for environmental change policy; economic 
valuation; political economy of environmental reforms; and impact evaluation of 
environmental interventions. 
In Dhanasar, we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the foreign national 
proposes to undertake." !d. at 889. The record, however, does not include evidence of the 
Petitioner's proposed projects in the United States, or other information about the specific consulting 
work the Petitioner will undertake in this country. In denying the petition, the Director indicated that 
the Petitioner did not submit a detailed description of his proposed endeavor and evidence of its 
substantial merit and national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner does not offer additional evidence or arguments for this prong, nor does the 
record support a finding that he meets it. To satisfy the national importance requirement, the 
Petitioner must demonstrate the "potential prospective impact" of his work. The Petitioner has not 
provided adequate information to establish that his proposed work as a consultant has implications at 
a level sufficient to establish the national importance of his endeavor. 5 For example, he does not 
sufficiently explain or demonstrate how his future work as a consultant stands to affect the oil 
industry or environmental economics field. Nor does the record show, for instance, that the specific 
work the Petitioner proposes to undertake stands to offer original innovations to advance the 
aforementioned industry, or that it otherwise has wider implications in his field. As the Petitioner 
has not established that his specific endeavor's prospective impact supports a finding of national 
importance, he has not met the first prong of the Dlumasar framework. 
B. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the Petitioner's qualifications. 6 
The Petitioner submitted his academic records, a "Certificate of Work Record" from and a 
5 In Dhwwsar, we detennined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance 
because they would not impact his field more broadly. !d. at 893. 
6 The Petitioner states that his "work in environmental matters began in 1991 and continued until his retirement from the 
4 
.
Matter ofT-S-5-
letter from discussing his job experience. In addition, the Petitioner offered two photographs 
indicating that he attended a 1991 meeting of copies of his business cards, and 
his "End-Of-Service Certificate" (August 2002) from With respect to his qualifications, the 
Petitioner states: 
[The Petitioner's] 35 years with the ' (including the four years 
he spent in the United States earning his baccalaureate degree) demonstrates [sic] a 
past history of demonstrable achievement. With his knowledge of American and 
Arab cultures, and fluency in English and Arabic, he has a proven ability to influence 
his field of expertise as a whole. Having worked for the largest oil company in the 
world ... at all levels of its oil production, [the Petitioner] is truly one of the few 
persons who possesses a breadth and depth of understanding of such economic and 
environmental issues. 
While the "Certiticate of·Work Record" from and letter from indicate that the Petitioner 
has experience in material pricing, managing inventory, and financial reporting and.analysis (for the 
marine and aviation departments), the record does not show that this past experience renders him well 
positioned to advance his proposed endeavor aimed at starting an environmental economics 
consulting service. The record does not reflect sufficient interest from potential customers, users, 
investors, or other relevant entities or individuals to demonstrate that he is well positioned to 
advance his proposed consultancy business. Nor does the evidence show that the Petitioner's track 
record of running a business, plan for future activities, and progress towards establishing his 
company rise to the level of rendering him well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. For 
these reasons, he has not established that he satisfies the second prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
C. Balancing Factors to Determine Waiver's Benefit to the United States 
As explained above, the third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would 
be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor 
certification. Because the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor and that he is well positioned to advance his endeavor as required by the first and second 
prongs of the Dhanusar framework, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver. Accordingly, 
discussion of the balancing factors under the third prong would serve no meaningful purpose. 
Ill. CONCLUSION 
/ 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite three prongs set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework, 
we find that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as 
a matter of discretion. 
in September 2002." According to the Petitioner's Form ET A-750B, he has not been employed since 
September 2002. 
5 
Matter ofT-S-S-
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofT-S-S-, ID# 1365037 (AAO June !4, 2018) 
ti